Oh, I certainly don't agree! Just as there's room in the world for all different kinds of music, there is room for many different kinds of art. Raphael, if the elephant YouTube video is the one I'm thinking of, that elephant has been trained by its mahout/human companion to paint in order to delight tourists. While very clever and very interesting, it's not, IMO, art. My grandmother had a parakeet that could say the Rosary, but that doesn't mean it was praying.

Keats may very well have been puzzled if he had been confronted by some of the works in a modern art museum. But, let's face it, he was a pretty clever guy, quick to catch onto things and was "capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason. . ."

"The philosopher proves that the philosopher exists. The poet merely enjoys existence."Wallace Stevens

I think I know what you mean Ravenwing. I volunteered at galleries where some "modern art" was so odd that captions were needed to explain it- people simply would have no idea what the art was supposed to be without it. Contrast this to paintings by the great artists of earlier centuries.

John....you did not live to see-who we are because of what you left,what it is we are in what we make of you.Peter Sanson, 1995.

LOL! I still don't agree, Raphael & Ravenwing. I will agree that some modern art is downright ugly. However, I believe that art doesn't have to be beautiful to be good art. (I'm thinking here of the many paintings, expertly rendered, of ship wrecks. All I can think when I see one is, "Oh no! Those poor people on board!")

Also, I will argue that there was plenty of art produced in past centuries that was praised at the time of its creation, only to be criticized in later years as too sentimental, too perfect, or too something. There was, too, a lot of art that was panned when new (Think of the Impressionists.) that is now loved by the general public and celebrated by art historians.

The reaction many people have to the work of the American artist, Andy Warhol, is "Huh? You've got to be kidding!" Yet, I love most of his stuff and I'm not alone in admiring it.

The glass art of Dale Chihuly is widely and justifiably praised. Most of his works are a delight for the eyes, but there is one piece at a university in a nearby city that looks like nothing so much as a bunch of blue plastic grocery bags caught on a telephone pole. http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3622/3429176587_ae4b8b8a25.jpg I chuckle to myself whenever I drive past it and enjoy the work, but probably not in the way the artist intended.

I also love most the work of Jacque Louis David (Whenever I visit the Cleveland Museum of Art I have to visit "Cupid and Psyche! I love the execution of the theme, the colors used, the very geometry in the painting. I love that Cupid is portrayed as a cheeky teenager who thinks he's getting away with something.) http://www.inquisition21.com/pca_1978/img/cupidpsyche.jpg I wonder how the painting was received when it was new. Most of the artist's works are very serious with this being a notable and delightful -- at least to me -- departure.

Again, the world is a big place and there is room here for all kinds of art and music.

Last edited by Cybele on Mon Jun 17, 2013 8:19 am, edited 1 time in total.

"The philosopher proves that the philosopher exists. The poet merely enjoys existence."Wallace Stevens

I admit to being a lover of modern art. I like art that seems to be one thing on the surface--but becomes something else upon further exploration (or begins to develop layers). And, as a wearer of a fauxhawk, I like funky art--strange art--art that isn't always meant to please. I like cheeky art, too. I remember at my undergrad college, there was an art display set up by a graduating student. Alongside it was a question: What did you think this was when you first glanced at it? How does it make you feel? What did you feel when you realized what it was? (viewers were encouraged to write their answers on a piece of paper and slip them into a nearby box.) On first glance, the sculpture appeared to be an apple tree covered with worm-riddled apples. Upon closer inspection, one could see that the "apples" were actually modeled from molds made of actual penises! Well, I thought it was hilarious! Especially considering what I assumed it was at first. Knowing some of what went "into" making this sculpture, I got a *whole* new depth perception into. . .perception--and assumption! (I also thought how wild it must be to tell your final project instructor that part of your project would involve making casts of dozens of different penises. LOL) Anyway, needless to say, while some modern art can really be uninspiring--that's not true for all modern art. Oh, and hey? Have any of you heard of Ai Wei Wei? His modern art is FABULOUS--and makes great commentary on Chinese politics. He's one of my art heroes

I'm sorry don't want to start an argument here but I do not see whatsoever the necessity of having a religion or religious education to being a poet, totally irrelevant and deeply insulting to people like myself who choose not to believe in any form of religion.

Saturn wrote:I'm sorry don't want to start an argument here but I do not see whatsoever the necessity of having a religion or religious education to being a poet, totally irrelevant and deeply insulting to people like myself who choose not to believe in any form of religion.

This forum is not a platform for such prejudiced views.

I have to agree with Saturn about the necessity of a connection between a religion and being a poet. To be brief, Keats was (most likely) a Deist but not a Christian, and in a moment of emotional fervor claimed love was his religion and that he could die for it. I'd say he's the most perfect poet ever, but I'm obsessively partial.

"But if you will fully love me, though there may be some fire, 'twill not be more than we can bear when moistened and bedewed with Pleasures." JK to FB 08.07.1819

What about modern day poets who write about every day things like riding on a bus? They probably have never even read any religious texts- poetry is just a literary form like the novel and it can be inspired by just about any subject.

John....you did not live to see-who we are because of what you left,what it is we are in what we make of you.Peter Sanson, 1995.